And yes, the same might be used to write articles but we can much more easily and rapidly review and reproduce a study (in my field). Reviews are so long - would referees be able to catch the overly positive and not sufficiently critical writings of an LLM? Gosh, I hope so. 🧐

LLMs regurgitate an overly positive account of *everything working wonderfully* which unscrupulous parties may use to turbo write a review, thus transforming tentative statements into 📢LOUD CLAIMS📢

Each paper typically ends with a few tentative implications that we already know err on being positive. We might take these with a small pinch of salt and deduce caveats on a critical reading of the methods and results. The LLM is of course not doing any of that, AND then...